Data's criteria for killing aren't confined to self-defence, I'm fairly sure. Presumably he's also prepared to kill in defence of others. Fajo made it clear that in Data's present circumstances, Fajo's continued existence presents a certain threat to the well-being not just of Data but of others, too.

Treating the show just as a drama, I can buy that, though looking at it more as a real world situation it seems to me that Data could probably incapacitate Fajo and take control of the vessel. But as depicted, it works perfectly.

Armus is slightly thornier. Data summarises him as possessing 'no redeeming features' and Armus is clearly miserable in his present circumstances. Even if it were possible to alleviate those circumstances, there's excellent reason to believe that would spell serious trouble for other people. So Data's conclusion there might best be regarded as a proposed involuntary euthanasia.

The reality is that Data's specific moral criteria vary from writer to writer on the show, but those particular incidents are reconcilable with some form of ethical system that's at least benevolent in intent.

How would Data have been able to do that? Data couldn't get close to Fajo because of the proximity-actuated field.

He already tried numerous other forms of resistance throughout the episode, and this was his only chance to get ahold of the disrupter.

Click to expand...

It's a fair point about the field, I'd forgotten about that. But he already has the disrupter, we're past that bit, aren't we? He might try to locate another weapon - one that can incapacitate from a distance as opposed to only being lethal - and work from there. He could warn Fajo's employees that Fajo plans to use them as ransom fodder to manipulate him and see if he can get one of them to assist him. He could even promise them that they can help themselves to some of Fajo's wealth if they help Data to bring Fajo to justice.

I suppose if Data truly thinks that none of those are viable options, he can shoot.

Though as I say, for dramatic purposes I've no problem with how it played out.

You mean that Data should have given Fajo a chance to activate another trap? You mean that Data should have tried to educate the crew about things that they already knew? Who knows what terrors Fajo had used to break them already.

We should take the episode at its word. Based on everything he knew, Data's only option was to fire. We can also believe that Data computed that conclusion in his positronic brain.

It's also worth pointing out that Fajo was cocky at that moment, because he didn't believe that Data actually would fire. Perhaps a single code word from Fajo would have transported Data back to his prison room. That moment was Data's best opportunity.

Data's criteria for killing aren't confined to self-defence, I'm fairly sure. Presumably he's also prepared to kill in defence of others. Fajo made it clear that in Data's present circumstances, Fajo's continued existence presents a certain threat to the well-being not just of Data but of others, too.

Treating the show just as a drama, I can buy that, though looking at it more as a real world situation it seems to me that Data could probably incapacitate Fajo and take control of the vessel. But as depicted, it works perfectly.

Armus is slightly thornier. Data summarises him as possessing 'no redeeming features' and Armus is clearly miserable in his present circumstances. Even if it were possible to alleviate those circumstances, there's excellent reason to believe that would spell serious trouble for other people. So Data's conclusion there might best be regarded as a proposed involuntary euthanasia.

The reality is that Data's specific moral criteria vary from writer to writer on the show, but those particular incidents are reconcilable with some form of ethical system that's at least benevolent in intent.

You mean that Data should have given Fajo a chance to activate another trap?

Click to expand...

Yes, possibly. It depends on his estimate of the probability that Fajo has another trap, the possibility of its working, versus the value derived from eliminating Fajo. I understand what you're saying about taking the episode at its word, and I've tried to be clear that I'm happy to do that, but just for the sake of chattin' about it, I'm wondering what questions I might ask if I were adjudicating over an inquiry into Data's actions.

You mean that Data should have tried to educate the crew about things that they already knew? Who knows what terrors Fajo had used to break them already.

Click to expand...

Varria had already turned. We know he had used particularly brutal methods on her. They clearly weren't entirely effective. 'Educating' is not the right term, either. I'm happy to say the crew knows that Fajo might threaten their lives to get his way. That's different, or at least it's plausibly different, from knowing that Fajo now intends to do that.

It's also worth pointing out that Fajo was cocky at that moment, because he didn't believe that Data actually would fire. Perhaps a single code word from Fajo would have transported Data back to his prison room. That moment was Data's best opportunity.

Click to expand...

You would think he would already have done that before Data got hold of the disruptor. But in spite of that, I don't think Data's preservation of his freedom was his main concern when deciding to fire. It was the continued threat to others that Fajo represented. We've already seen that Data's prepared to put the lives of others over his own autonomy (the chair, when Varria is threatened). That would seem to imply that if Data is only thinking about his own freedom, rather than kill Fajo he would return to his cell and attempt to escape later.

I don't think so. For one thing, Data doesn't say that's why, and you would think he might, no? Neither does Data appear to petition for Fajo to receive the death penalty, even though he killed Varria.

Basically I don't see any evidence that Data's reasoning is punitive, or that he subscribes to a retributive theory of justice at all.

You would think he would already have done that before Data got hold of the disruptor.

Click to expand...

As I said, he was cocky, which was fortunate.

But in spite of that, I don't think Data's preservation of his freedom was his main concern when deciding to fire. It was the continued threat to others that Fajo represented.

Click to expand...

I agree.

Of course, however, the next question is, why did he lie about it afterwards. That would seem to imply that even though he thought it was necessary, it still violated parameters of his ethical subroutines. And the fact that he could lie about it afterwards would really only compound the unethical behavior, wouldn't it.

Fajo was probably right that that sort of killing violated certain parameters in Data's subroutines, but just wrong that Data would lack the means to be able to overcome the limitations in such circumstances.

Of course, however, the next question is, why did he lie about it afterwards. That would seem to imply that even though he thought it was necessary, it still violated parameters of his ethical subroutines. And the fact that he could lie about it afterwards would really only compound the unethical behavior, wouldn't it.

Click to expand...

It would, which implies to me that he did it simply to avoid a charge of attempted murder. Data already has experience of the somewhat arbitrary nature of Starfleet military law, doesn't he? If he'd had an advocate less capable than Picard, he might be gathering dust on a shelf somewhere as the victim of a failed experiment.

If we assume that he in fact believes he behaved correctly, given that his dilemma has been obviated by his rescue, he might simply wish to avoid what he sees as the unnecessary risk of being convicted of a crime he knows was justified in the circumstances.

Fajo was probably right that that sort of killing violated certain parameters in Data's subroutines, but just wrong that Data would lack the means to be able to overcome the limitations in such circumstances.

Click to expand...

I tend to think Fajo was simply mistaken about the nature of Data's subroutines. He assumed that 'do not kill' was an immutable absolute. But Data had already assisted in the marooning in space of his brother Lore. That might not be 'murder' but it could certainly have plausibly caused Lore's death, so it is at the least cruel and unusual punishment and at the worst wilful endangerment of life (they don't even try to locate Lore later and beam him into the brig or whatever, they just leave him to drift and be found by Pakleds).

Data appeared to have no ethical problems with killing in the line of duty.

Click to expand...

precisely what I was thinking. He can't have a strict code against killing except in strict self-defense and still be in Starfleet. I'm not sure why they bothered with that silliness-doesn't Fajo make fun of it, saying "a pacifist soldier? whose bright idea was that?"

Here's what I don't get about Fajo's energy field. Couldn't Data have just thrown something at him, or used a good ol pointed stick? If the smoke monster could figure that out so could Data.

Wouldn't killing Fajo have been an act of defending others, had the Enterprise not figured out he was still alive? Fajo was not only a mass murderer, he was a slave driver who would, for sure, murder and enslave more innocent people in the future.

I think Fajo saw Data as just a robot like we see the little Japanese robot dogs. He didn't think Data was capable of forming original thoughts.

Starfleet has never been Pacifist. They do, however, strongly prefer peace to conflict, to such an extent that they are over-eager to make ridiculous concessions to avoid war. Data's the same, and Fajo put him in a position where the moral cost of letting him live exceeded the moral cost of killing him.

Data already has experience of the somewhat arbitrary nature of Starfleet military law, doesn't he? If he'd had an advocate less capable than Picard, he might be gathering dust on a shelf somewhere as the victim of a failed experiment.

If we assume that he in fact believes he behaved correctly, given that his dilemma has been obviated by his rescue, he might simply wish to avoid what he sees as the unnecessary risk of being convicted of a crime he knows was justified in the circumstances.

Data had every right to kill Fajo, both to remove him as a threat to himself and others and because as a Starfleet officer he had a duty to escape. The fact that, in that particular moment, he was not an immediate threat is irrelevant, because at any moment members of Fajo's crew could arrive to try to capture him again. Once that happened Fajo would inevitably increase his security precautions, making escape even more difficult. Data had no reason to believe outside help would ever arrive and so he had to act immediately.

Data had every right to kill Fajo, both to remove him as a threat to himself...

Click to expand...

Data was armed and Fajo was not. Data was not under threat. All Data has to do is put Fajo in the escape pod and seal it shut. Fajo won't be able to do anything from inside there if Data disables its controls.

...and others and because as a Starfleet officer he had a duty to escape.

Click to expand...

And killing Fajo was not an essential part of that. Data's escape did not depend on Fajo's death.

The fact that, in that particular moment, he was not an immediate threat is irrelevant, because at any moment members of Fajo's crew could arrive to try to capture him again.

Click to expand...

Data is armed. Also, he could easily knock a few heads together. There's no reason the crew was equipped with those anti-android devices like Fajo was. Data could probably take over the ship single handedly.

Once that happened Fajo would inevitably increase his security precautions, making escape even more difficult. Data had no reason to believe outside help would ever arrive and so he had to act immediately.

Click to expand...

This is assuming that Fajo would succeed, which I think is very unlikely.

Data firing at Fajo was a terrible decision. Fajo was unarmed and in no position to threaten Data. Data should have been courtmartialled.

Click to expand...

By no stretch of the imagination was Fajo 'Unarmed'. He wasn't holding a weapon at that very moment, but the power he had over Data and his own crew is a form of armament.

He had no other means to harm or coerce Fajo available to him at the time. Also, since Fajo had all the access codes and nobody else would dare disobey him, no other means to escape. His options were literally, kill him or surrender to him, arming him in the process.

And Fajo had unlawfully imprisoned, enslaved, and declared war on Fajo.

Now, had Data known that the Enterprise had found him, then you would be correct, but he had no way to know that.

Data firing at Fajo was a terrible decision. Fajo was unarmed and in no position to threaten Data. Data should have been courtmartialled.

Click to expand...

Ahh... The Fajo debate reignites. The man had a 24th century starship at his disposal, & declared that the only way to stop him was to kill him, surrender, or face the consequence of him killing anyone in his way in order to get what he wanted.

Knowing Data as an exceedingly well reasoned individual, we can assume he weighed carefully his options & actions, and made the right choice, for the circumstance. Fajo's mistake was to assume Data can't grow beyond his programming, which we all know is certainly not the case

Data was acting in the defense of himself & others while abducted, and was spared the actual consequence of having to kill the guy. Plus, as he may have considered his actions being of a personal nature & not as a Starfleet officer, when Riker asked him about the disruptor discharge, his response of "Perhaps something happened during transport" was a clear cut dose of "mind your own business"

Ahh... The Fajo debate reignites. The man had a 24th century starship at his disposal, & declared that the only way to stop him was to kill him, surrender, or face the consequence of him killing anyone in his way in order to get what he wanted.

Click to expand...

And you believe him?

Knowing Data as an exceedingly well reasoned individual, we can assume he weighed carefully his options & actions, and made the right choice, for the circumstance. Fajo's mistake was to assume Data can't grow beyond his programming, which we all know is certainly not the case

Click to expand...

In other words, Data did it, Data always makes the best choices, therefore what Data did was right.

But, it wasn't Data, it was the writer of the episode. The writer of the episode dropped the ball.

Data was acting in the defense of himself & others while abducted, and was spared the actual consequence of having to kill the guy. Plus, as he may have considered his actions being of a personal nature & not as a Starfleet officer, when Riker asked him about the disruptor discharge, his response of "Perhaps something happened during transport" was a clear cut dose of "mind your own business"

Click to expand...

Data was acting in defense? Fajo was disarmed and helpless. He was no threat to anyone.

And Data avoiding the issue the way he did with Riker is so far out of character it isn't funny.